Perceptions of the Era and Ideological Explorations of Jeon Woo During the Loss of Sovereignty

This article is Toegye Yi Hwang and “dialogue and communication”. Jeon Woo diagnosed the cause of the national crisis at the end of the Joseon dynasty as the decline of Confucian Learning of the Way (道學), which led to a failure in social education (敎化). In response, he sought to clarify the essence of Confucian Learning of the Way and establish a correct path for practical implementation. The "practical path" that Jeon Woo identified was twofold. The first was to align the movements of the mind with reason, which was connected to the doctrine of "The Nature as Teacher, the Mind as Disciple" (性師心弟說). The second was to align the engagement and reclusion with reason, which was referred to “engagement only with adequate treatment” (用舍行藏論). Jeon Woo summarized the duties of a Confucian scholar as "virtuous action" and "enterprise," proclaiming that "virtuous action must be fundamentally based on the correct principle of nature (性命), and enterprise must be fundamentally achieved by the precise discernment of one’s moral duty regarding engagment/reclusion." However, he criticized the scholars of his time, noting that some claimed "Mind is Principle" (心卽理), regarding their own will as righteous, while others pursued only "achievements and accomplishments" (事功), rashly seeking positions in the court. Consequently, Jeon Woo expressed concern that those who espoused "Mind is Principle" would ultimately fall into self-indulgence, and those who pursued only "achievements and accomplishments" would lose their integrity as scholars and fail to practice the true Way. Jeon Woo's critique of the "Mind is Principle" doctrine held by the Hwaseo School was philosophically valid. However, his labeling of the Hwaseo School's practical theory—that even reclusive scholars can discuss national affairs in times of national crisis—as "the doctrine of achievements and accomplishments" and his criticism of it as a "culture left by hegemonic rule" was an excessive reproach.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-06-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.33213/thlj.2025.0.36.131
Primary Topic
Religious Studies and Spiritual Practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Perceptions of the Era and Ideological Explorations of Jeon Woo During the Loss of Sovereignty

Sangik Lee
Religious Studies and Spiritual Practices
article

Perceptions of the Era and Ideological Explorations of Jeon Woo During the Loss of Sovereignty

Sangik Lee
article en

Abstract

This article is Toegye Yi Hwang and “dialogue and communication”. Jeon Woo diagnosed the cause of the national crisis at the end of the Joseon dynasty as the decline of Confucian Learning of the Way (道學), which led to a failure in social education (敎化). In response, he sought to clarify the essence of Confucian Learning of the Way and establish a correct path for practical implementation. The "practical path" that Jeon Woo identified was twofold. The first was to align the movements of the mind with reason, which was connected to the doctrine of "The Nature as Teacher, the Mind as Disciple" (性師心弟說). The second was to align the engagement and reclusion with reason, which was referred to “engagement only with adequate treatment” (用舍行藏論). Jeon Woo summarized the duties of a Confucian scholar as "virtuous action" and "enterprise," proclaiming that "virtuous action must be fundamentally based on the correct principle of nature (性命), and enterprise must be fundamentally achieved by the precise discernment of one’s moral duty regarding engagment/reclusion." However, he criticized the scholars of his time, noting that some claimed "Mind is Principle" (心卽理), regarding their own will as righteous, while others pursued only "achievements and accomplishments" (事功), rashly seeking positions in the court. Consequently, Jeon Woo expressed concern that those who espoused "Mind is Principle" would ultimately fall into self-indulgence, and those who pursued only "achievements and accomplishments" would lose their integrity as scholars and fail to practice the true Way. Jeon Woo's critique of the "Mind is Principle" doctrine held by the Hwaseo School was philosophically valid. However, his labeling of the Hwaseo School's practical theory—that even reclusive scholars can discuss national affairs in times of national crisis—as "the doctrine of achievements and accomplishments" and his criticism of it as a "culture left by hegemonic rule" was an excessive reproach.

Vol. 36
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Religious Studies and Spiritual Practices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.